enum values not working in #define?

So yet again I'm working through the teach yourself c++ in 21 days and I am stuck again.

This is in regard to different debugging macro levels.

Heres the example...

Code:

#include <iostream>
#include <string.h>

using namespace std;

enum LEVEL { NONE, LOW, MEDIUM, HIGH };
const int FALSE = 0;
const int TRUE = 1;
typedef int BOOL;

#define DEBUGLEVEL LOW

#if DEBUGLEVEL < LOW
#define ASSERT(x)
#else
#define ASSERT(x) \
    if (! (x)) \
    { \
        cout << "ERROR!! Assert " << #x << " failed\n"; \
        cout << " on line " << __LINE__ << "\n"; \
        cout << " in file " << __FILE__ << "\n"; \
    }
#endif

#if DEBUGLEVEL < MEDIUM
#define EVAL(x)
#else
#define EVAL(x) \
    cout << #x << ":\t" << x << endl;

#endif

#if DEBUGLEVEL < HIGH
#define PRINT(x)
#else
#define PRINT(x) \
     cout << x << endl;
#endif

So depending on what I set DEBUGLEVEL to be should decide what methods I want. As it stands the output always acts as if I'm using HIGH, but if I just use numbers such as...

Code:

#define DEBUGLEVEL 1

#if DEBUGLEVEL < 1

it works as expected.

so whats up with the enum LEVEL stuff not working?

The preprocessor doesn't know anything about the language. For all it knows, HIGH is the same as SNORKEL -- it's just a bunch of letters.

Its copied straight from the book, how do I fix it?

You have to define it

Code:

#define LOW 1

OK so why would the book try to use an enumeration if the preprocessor doesn't understand it?

Originally Posted by MattJ812

OK so why would the book try to use an enumeration if the preprocessor doesn't understand it?

I'm not seeing this example in the book. Do you have a page number?

Using the PDF I'm on 543 of 772

Code:

any number of levels, a common system is to have four levels: HIGH, MEDIUM, LOW, and NONE.
Listing 17.8 illustrates how this might be done, using the String and Animal classes from Listing
17.6. The definitions of the class methods other than Invariants() have been left out to save
space because they are unchanged from Listing 17.6.
NOTE: To compile this code, copy lines 43-136 of Listing 17.6 between lines 64 and
65 of this listing.
Listing 17.8. Levels of debugging.
0: enum LEVEL { NONE, LOW, MEDIUM, HIGH };
1: const int FALSE = 0;
2: const int TRUE = 1;
3: typedef int BOOL;
4:
5: #define DEBUGLEVEL HIGH
6:
7: #include <iostream.h>
8: #include <string.h>
9:
10:

Hmm. Listing 17.8 in the copy I'm looking at is about cin.ignore(). Granted I can only look at the 5th ed. Perhaps they realized it was an atrocious idea and took it out. The #define part works just fine. But you won't be able to use < and > with it.

OK so you're saying the enumeration works aslong as I don't test if the DEBUGLEVEL is less or greater than? Why is that?

And you say you have the 5th edition? where do I get it? mine is 2nd i didn't download it very long ago.

Originally Posted by MattJ812

OK so you're saying the enumeration works aslong as I don't test if the DEBUGLEVEL is less or greater than? Why is that?

And you say you have the 5th edition? where do I get it? mine is 2nd i didn't download it very long ago.

Because they are not valid types. So there are not the logical operations for them. You can go to the bookstore.

Were they valid types when they wrote that?

Im sorry I was under the assumption that this book was kept up online, it took long enough to figure out how to get a compiler to even start to learn from it.

My school has a subscription to Safari Online; many libraries do.

#define just does text substitution. Sprinkling the word HIGH throughout your code is just fine, because your enum will turn that into a number. But the preprocessor does not know -- has no way of knowing or caring -- about that value, and as such any attempt to actually use the value is doomed to failure.

That makes you wonder why they wrote that code. Given that it's the second edition

All editions will have errata.

I'm not in school I've been wanting to code games forever and learned a whole bunch about GML but I wanted to learn more about "proper" coding and c++ in 21 is what I found so here I am.

Learn as I go I guess, hard to do when your learning materials are wrong heh.

Thanks tho.